BishopAccountability.org
	Church Painfully Slow to Learn Lessons of Abuse The Age August 12, 2009 http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/church-painfully-slow-to-learn-lessons-of-abuse-20090811-egwt.html Catholic leaders have been loath to tackle institutional complicity. FOR an institution in which confession is a sacrament, the Catholic Church struggles to openly acknowledge its responsibilities for the sins of its priests. At times, it has given the clear impression that it wishes sexual abuse victims would shut up and go away. A year ago, the World Youth Day organiser, Bishop Anthony Fisher epitomised that attitude when he accused those calling for a papal apology of ''dwelling crankily on old wounds''. Now, in response to calls for a review of the Melbourne Archdiocese's system of handling abuse cases, known as the Melbourne Response, the Catholic Vicar-General, Bishop Les Tomlinson, tells The Age: ''You could perhaps draw a conclusion that there is what could be termed a victims' industry … willing to exploit these victims for their own gain.'' Then there is Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart who told a woman who had been sexually abused by a priest to ''go to hell, bitch''. He told The Age he did not recall this, although he apologised in court in 2004 for what the magistrate said was an ''appalling and ungracious act''. To be fair to the archbishop, the magistrate said that while the behaviour of the woman, who knocked on his door at 1.20am, ''may be entirely understandable in one sense, it is absolutely unacceptable behaviour in all other senses''. The woman had been subject to an intervention order after harassing him and his staff. While Archbishop Hart's words have come back to shame him, the bigger issue is church leaders' evasive responses and their reluctance to take responsibility for what has happened to abuse victims since the Melbourne Response was set up by then Archbishop George Pell in 1996. Far from being ''old wounds'', the 450 cases handled since include many fresh instances of abuse, some of which have been made possible by the church's actions or omissions. In the case of the woman who confronted Archbishop Hart, in 2001 she was abused by notorious priest Barry Whelan - who has been accused of abuse by five women - after his suspension in the 1990s for abusing another woman had been overturned. There has never been any public review of whether any of the 450 or so cases shed light on how priests were able to reoffend. As The Age reports, church investigators have even compromised police investigations. In the case of priest Paul Pavlou, the Melbourne Response told him about a police investigation. When police searched Pavlou's house, his computer's hard drive was, unsurprisingly, wiped. But some material was retrieved and Pavlou was sentenced last month to a suspended 18-month jail term after he pleaded guilty to two counts of ''indecent acts''. In a 2002 case, a victim who was raped as a boy by priest Terence Pidoto, says he was told only after being interviewed by the church investigator of his right to contact police and that Pidato's lawyers could use this interview to question him in court - as they did. The Melbourne Response has not been as fair and as compassionate towards victims of abuse as it should be. Sometimes, the church has appeared to be protecting offenders from the full weight of the law. Church leaders may feel they are protecting their institution. However, they should heed the lessons of this year's Ryan report, which found the institutional responses of denial, obfuscation and excuse left the Irish church complicit in the evil acts of individuals. Rather than protecting the church, such attitudes undermine it by eroding the trust and belief that are the source of its strength. Calls for a review of the Melbourne Response have the support of retired Sydney bishop Geoffrey Robinson, who headed the church's response to the crisis of sexual abuse in the 1990s. He says some victims have felt intimidated by the system and a thorough review would be timely. Newcastle bishop Michael Malone has applauded a collective formed by abuse victims and said he would not excuse a church ''which refuses to listen or admit there is fault''. As one collective member, the mother of the boy abused by Pavlou, says: ''I want the church to improve the way children and parents at schools and parishes can seek help if they encounter inappropriate behaviour by a priest. That is all I have ever asked for and the Melbourne archdiocese has never delivered on this.' These are not the words of a ''victims' industry'' focused on compensation. The Melbourne church must be more open to what victims of abuse are saying and more understanding of their suffering, which its internal processes perpetuate. Only by becoming more open and accountable can the church demonstrate true contrition and end the institutionalised cycle of abuse. Health of financial sector depends on competition ONE of the reasons why Australia appears to have been spared the worst of the global recession is, the nation's political and business leaders keep assuring us, the strength of the banking system. That strength derives partly from a stricter system of prudential regulation than that which applied in some other countries, including the United States, and partly from specific measures that the Rudd Government applied after the recession began. The Government has guaranteed deposits, and even more importantly, guaranteed the banks' own borrowing from overseas banks. Thus the system has not only survived but, by comparison with the US, Britain and Iceland, it has barely teetered. Yet it is not intact, either. It may be that one of the enduring consequences of the recession for Australia will be the further concentration of financial power in the big four trading banks: the Commonwealth, Westpac, NAB and the ANZ. They now account for 92 per cent of new mortgages, having gobbled up or outlasted most of their smaller regional competitors and the leading non-bank lenders. In a submission to the Senate Economics Committee, University of NSW associate professor Frank Zumbo this week deplored the continuing loss of competition and said the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission should ask the Federal Court to order the Commonwealth to sell BankWest, and Westpac to sell St George Bank. There is still, he said, a ''limited window of opportunity'' for the ACCC to act. Very limited indeed, it must be said, but Professor Zumbo is right to draw attention to the dangers of oligopoly. It may not be feasible to force the big four to divest assets they have already bought, but further loss of competition - especially mergers between any of the four - must be resisted.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.